Audubon County Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Audubon Co., Iowa) 1885-1894, 1887-06-23
RAILROAD DECISION.
Ruling Of the Commission on the Fourth
Section OF the Interstate Com.
merce Law.
The Railroads Must Decide for Thorn.
selves About the Special Rates-.-
Summary Of the Boards
Decision.

WASHINGTON, June 16.-The interstate
commerce commission rendered, June
10, the long expected decision upon the
fourth section of the Inter State Commerce
act The decision is very long, compris-
ing more than fifteen thousand words.
The Commission, after mature considera,
ton. reports itself satisfied that the
statute does not require 1t to prescribe in
every instance which is an exceptional
case and TO grant its order for relief
before the carrier is at liberty in its
tariffs to depart from the general rule.
The carrier must judge for itself what
are substantially similar circumstances
and the conditions which preclude the
special rate, rebate or drawback which Is
made unlawful since no tribunal is
empowered to judge for it until after the
carrier has acted and then only for the
purpose of determining whether its
action constitutes a violation of the law.
The carrier judges on the peril of
the consequences, but the special
rates which it grants are not
illegal when 1t turns out that the
consequences and conditions are not such
as forbid it, The commission will not
undertake to decide in advance what
does or does not constitute discrimination
under substantially similar circumstances
and conditions, but will leave the railroads
to act on their own judgment subject to
accountability before the Commission
and courts.
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE RAILROADS.
For the guidance, however, of railroad
companies the Commission has consider
ed at great length, nearly all the questions
raised under the 4th section of the law, and
has reached the conclusions which are
summarized as follows:
1. The prohibition in the fourth section
against greater charge for shorter
than for long distance over the same
line and in the same direction the short
err being included in longer distances, as
qualified therein, is limited to cases in
which the circumstances and conditions
are substantially similar.
2. The phrase under substantially sim
liar circumstances and conditions in the
section, and under a qualified form of
prohibition in the fourth section, carriers
are required to judge in the first instance
with regard to similarity and dissmllarity
of circumstances that forbid or permit
greater charge for shorter distance.
3. The judgment of carriers in respect
to the circumstances and conditions is
not final, but subject to the authority of
the commission and the courts.
4. The provisions of section l, requiring
that the charges be reasonable and just,
and of section 2, fnrbidding unjust dis
elimination, apply when exceptional
charges are made under section 4, as they
do in other cases.
8. The existence of actual competition,
which is of controlling force in respect to
the traffic so important in amount as to
make out dissimilar circumstances and
conditions, will entitle the carrier to
charge less for the longer than for the
shorter haul over the same line and in the
same direction, the shorter being included
in the longer in the following cases:
When in competition with carriers by
water which are not subject to the pro-
visions of the statute
@. When in competition with foreign
or other railroads which are not subject
to the provisions of this statute. In rare
and peculiar cases competition between
railroads which are subject to this statute;
when the strict application of the general
rule of the statute would be distinctIye
Of competition.
The Commission further decides that
when greater change in the aggregate
10 uduC loi thC haho poi'atioh VI paoSSh'
gers or like kind of property for
shorter than for longer distance over
the same line in the same direction the
shorter being included in the longer dis
lance, it is not sufficient justification
therefore, that traffic which is subjected
to such greater charge in way or local
traffic and that which is given more fav-
orable rates is not nor is it sufficient JUS
LITIGATION for such greater charge that the
short haul traffic is more expensive to the
carrier, unless when circumstances such
as make it exceptionally expensive or the
long haul traffic exceptionally inexpcn-
sive, the difference being extraordinary
and susceptible of proof. nor that the
lesser charge on longer haul is merely a
continuation of the favorable rates under
which the trade centers or industrial es-
Establishments have been built up. The
fact that long haul traffic will only bear
certain rates is no reasan for carrying it
for less than cost at the expense of other
traffic.